It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Wonder why there were two United 93 crash sites?

page: 3
18
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 02:00 PM
link   

Originally posted by earthdude
That is the perfect theory that the FBI should have used in the first place. In hindsight, consolidating the debris field was a bad idea.


And what makes you think they didn't?




posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 02:02 PM
link   


I'm not taling about suitcases, more like engines and flight control sufaces.
reply to post by Ivar_Karlsen
 


The engines were smashed into little pieces and were covered by the dust, that's why you can't see them.
We're talking about letters with peoples addresses in California.
Pay attention it was explained in the video.

Right Hooper?



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 02:03 PM
link   
reply to post by maxella1
 

I didn't catch the sarcasm? was that sarcasm?



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 02:05 PM
link   

Originally posted by Ivar_Karlsen

Originally posted by earthdude
That is the perfect theory that the FBI should have used in the first place. In hindsight, consolidating the debris field was a bad idea.


And what makes you think they didn't?

Nobody has seen the heavy airplane part with an FBI tag saying it came out of the lake.



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 02:18 PM
link   

Originally posted by earthdude
reply to post by maxella1
 

I didn't catch the sarcasm? was that sarcasm?



No just a joke



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 02:21 PM
link   
reply to post by maxella1
 



Do I really need to show you proof that the government lie?


Yes. Yes you do. Accusing someone (and the "government" is made of persons) is very serious. Particularly with regard to mass murder.

You need to show proof, beyond a reaonable doubt:
What is the actual truth.
That the person you accuse of lying knew what the actual truth was.
That the person said something other than the truth to purposely decieve.
That the lie was material to the matter at hand.

That is lying. Not just hearing something you don't think is right.



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 02:41 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by maxella1
 



Do I really need to show you proof that the government lie?


Yes. Yes you do. Accusing someone (and the "government" is made of persons) is very serious. Particularly with regard to mass murder.

You need to show proof, beyond a reaonable doubt:
What is the actual truth.
That the person you accuse of lying knew what the actual truth was.
That the person said something other than the truth to purposely decieve.
That the lie was material to the matter at hand.

That is lying. Not just hearing something you don't think is right.


You win Hooper! I'm not here to prove anything. People are smart enough to think for them selfs, including you.
I will leave it up to whoever wants to show you proof.
Your job is done here.



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 02:57 PM
link   
reply to post by scottromansky
 


One it did not travel 6 miles

That is the road driving distance some idiot came up with when put location into map program

Distance is more like 1 mile, it was direction that wind was blowing

The debris was scraps of paper and metallic foil insulation from interior of plane



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 03:04 PM
link   
reply to post by earthdude
 



Nobody has seen the heavy airplane part with an FBI tag saying it came out of the lake.


Guess you are talking about piece of engine fan which found some 300 yards from main crash scene
It was found in catch pond downhill from main crash location


Experts on the scene tell PM that a fan from one of the engines was recovered in a catchment basin, downhill from the crash site. Jeff Reinbold, the National Park Service representative responsible for the Flight 93 National Memorial, confirms the direction and distance from the crash site to the basin: just over 300 yards south, which means the fan landed in the direction the jet was traveling. "It's not unusual for an engine to move or tumble across the ground," says Michael K. Hynes, an airline accident expert who investigated the crash of TWA Flight 800 out of New York City in 1996. "When you have very high velocities, 500 mph or more," Hynes says, "you are talking about 700 to 800 ft. per second. For something to hit the ground with that kind of energy, it would only take a few seconds to bounce up and travel 300 yards." Numerous crash analysts contacted by PM concur.



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 03:13 PM
link   
reply to post by thedman
 

No I made it up. Cop trick. It worked.



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 03:19 PM
link   

Originally posted by thedman
reply to post by scottromansky
 


One it did not travel 6 miles

That is the road driving distance some idiot came up with when put location into map program

Distance is more like 1 mile, it was direction that wind was blowing

The debris was scraps of paper and metallic foil insulation from interior of plane


Do you know who that “idiot” is?
Because in the video Bill Crowley said New Baltimore is 8 miles away.



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 03:20 PM
link   
reply to post by maxella1
 


LoL, 30 to a hundred years from now,an old pilot will testify that he shot that airplane down out of feeling guilty.
why do you think they made that stupid movie!

4-17-2012.
edit on 17-4-2012 by LastProphet527 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 03:32 PM
link   

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by maxella1
 


There was only one crash site. There were not two crash sites.


Did you watch his video?
For a full-time 9-11 blogger you are sadly misinformed.
Many books point to 2 sites of debris.

The oddest coincidences for a "crash" is the small amount of recognizable human remains;

There was also the gruesome detail that the human remains collected were not commensurate with the number of passengers. "The collective weight of the forty-four people aboard the plane was seven thousand five hundred pounds, the coroner said. Only six hundred pounds of remains were discovered ...." (Longman 260) According to a reporter: "the largest piece of human tissue found was a section of spine eight inches long." (London Daily Mirror, 2002)

"Finding the flight data recorder had been the focus of investigators as they widened their search area today following the discoveries of more debris, including what appeared to be human remains, miles from the point of impact at a reclaimed coal mine." [Pittsburgh Post Gazette, 09/13/01]
In the shot down theory, the plane would have blown up in mid-air.



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 03:49 PM
link   
reply to post by pupetmaster
 



Did you watch his video?

No. (I don't even know what video you are talking about, but I'm pretty sure I didn't watch it)

For a full-time 9-11 blogger you are sadly misinformed.

You mean well informed.

Many books point to 2 sites of debris.

What the hell is a debris site? The plane crashed at one point on the planet earth. Only one. FInd a piece of paper or bit of metal somewhere else doesn't mean there are "two" crash sites. It means that crashing at 65% of the speed of sound is a violent act with a large amount of energy.

The oddest coincidences for a "crash" is the small amount of recognizable human remains;

I guess it must be "odd" since you used the word "odd" to describe it. Why is it "odd"? Plane was going over 500 MPH, loaded with fuel and crashed into the ground. Why is it odd that organic construction like the human body would be upset by these circumstances.

There was also the gruesome detail that the human remains collected were not commensurate with the number of passengers. "The collective weight of the forty-four people aboard the plane was seven thousand five hundred pounds, the coroner said. Only six hundred pounds of remains were discovered ...." (Longman 260) According to a reporter: "the largest piece of human tissue found was a section of spine eight inches long." (London Daily Mirror, 2002)

Again, plane full of fuel, 500 plus MPH.

"Finding the flight data recorder had been the focus of investigators as they widened their search area today following the discoveries of more debris, including what appeared to be human remains, miles from the point of impact at a reclaimed coal mine." [Pittsburgh Post Gazette, 09/13/01]
In the shot down theory, the plane would have blown up in mid-air.

Why? Just because a plane is "shot down" doesn't mean it breaks up or explodes in mid-air. When was that rule established? By the way - there is no "shot down theory". Thats just a little twisted fairy tale made up by all the conspiracist. In order to be a theory there has to some reference to some factual observation.



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 04:25 PM
link   

Originally posted by LastProphet527
reply to post by maxella1
 


LoL, 30 to a hundred years from now,an old pilot will testify that he shot that airplane down out of feeling guilty.
why do you think they made that stupid movie!

4-17-2012.
edit on 17-4-2012 by LastProphet527 because: (no reason given)


Like this one?



Hey Hooper, do you think LastProphet527 could turnout to be right ?



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 04:36 PM
link   
No passenger airplanes crashed or were shot down on 9/11/2001.

All these contradictory alleyways are designed to encourage
dead-end conspiracies and obfuscate the fact that everything
about the Official 9/11 story is a (twin tower) tall tale.
edit on 17-4-2012 by pshea38 because: (no reason given)



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 04:38 PM
link   

Originally posted by maxella1

Originally posted by Alfie1

Originally posted by scottromansky

Originally posted by hooper
reply to post by maxella1
 


There was only one crash site. There were not two crash sites.


Yes true, the thing is why were there multiple debris fields scattered 6 miles apart, that must mean the plane started breaking up before it went down.


The idea that the plane broke up before crashing is not borne out by the recovered flight data recorder, the cockpit voice recorder nor witnesses.

Why couldn't " very light material such as paper " travel on the wind as the NTSB said was probable ?


Exactly!!
When I find paper with peoples addresses on it, I immediately call the authorities. Because it might have come from a crime scene miles away.

No cover up here.

The chances of paper from a crash site accumulating after being windswept several miles into one location is utterly ridiculous. Think about it for a moment. Really? Paper from Crash Site A gets carried on the wind and accumulates at Site B. Think of dispersion, osmosis and chaos theory. I agree: "No cover up here."



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 05:00 PM
link   
reply to post by Alfie1
 


Alfie, Alfie, Alfie....I have a bridge to sell you.....you are on ATS....use the site and educate yourself....



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 05:01 PM
link   

Originally posted by pshea38
No passenger airplanes crashed or were shot down on 9/11/2001.

All these contradictory alleyways are designed to encourage
dead-end conspiracies and obfuscate the fact that everything
about the Official 9/11 story is a (twin tower) tall tale.
edit on 17-4-2012 by pshea38 because: (no reason given)


The airplanes were actually space crafts controlled by grays, and equipped with lasers. The twin towers were holograms, they never existed in this dimension, instead they were projected from a inter-dimensional drone. The victims were cyborgs with self-destruct function, which once initiated create humanoid-like body parts.

This type of bullsh** IS offensive to the victims families, and those poor people that died on 9/11.
You are free to believe whatever you want, But those were real peoples life’s, and families loss.



posted on Apr, 17 2012 @ 06:17 PM
link   

Originally posted by maxella1

Originally posted by pshea38
No passenger airplanes crashed or were shot down on 9/11/2001.

All these contradictory alleyways are designed to encourage
dead-end conspiracies and obfuscate the fact that everything
about the Official 9/11 story is a (twin tower) tall tale.
edit on 17-4-2012 by pshea38 because: (no reason given)


The airplanes were actually space crafts controlled by grays, and equipped with lasers. The twin towers were holograms, they never existed in this dimension, instead they were projected from a inter-dimensional drone. The victims were cyborgs with self-destruct function, which once initiated create humanoid-like body parts.

This type of bullsh** IS offensive to the victims families, and those poor people that died on 9/11.
You are free to believe whatever you want, But those were real peoples life’s, and families loss.


You are only showing yourself up with your dribble, when the proof is clear and
out there for all to see.
www.911research.dsl.pipex.com...

There were few if any real victims on 9/11, most being computer generated
entities with no basis in reality.
You were, and more unforgivably, still are, being suckered.


Do you see what they did here?


Or here?


Or here?

What terrible and retarded efforts at fakery!

There are no excuses left.

Media Insiders Created 911 Terror In USA.

edit on 17-4-2012 by pshea38 because: (no reason given)



new topics

top topics



 
18
<< 1  2    4  5  6 >>

log in

join